If opposition parties are not allowed to hold meetings why would the election not remain fair?

Correct answer: Because voters will not get alternative views

Answer: A. A fair election requires meaningful competition and a real opportunity for voters to hear different programmes, criticisms, and policy proposals. Meetings allow opposition parties to communicate with citizens, answer questions, and present alternatives to the ruling party. If they are prohibited from meeting, the ruling side receives a major advantage and voters may hear only one organised viewpoint. A is therefore correct. B is wrong because secret voting protects privacy; it does not explain why banning meetings is unfair. C is wrong because an accurate voter list is useful, but it does not replace the freedom to campaign and communicate. D is wrong because faster counting has nothing to do with equal political opportunity. Memory cue: no opposition voice means no real choice.